The second rule is seems illogical as there is no set definition what difficulty includes which gameplay-elements.
Depending on the song different gameplay-elements are appropriate to reflect the song, making it impossible to judge what difficulty name a map should receive.
The only way I see is classifying the difficulties after the gameplayelements in a scheme like
Used snaps; Most Used Spacing(time);DS Used; SV Used;Frequency of DS Changes; Frequency of SV Changes; Main Patterns used
So my difficulty(3,8*) may be called
124;2;-;1.8;10;10;Flowbased Sliders on high/changing SV
opposed to my second difficulty(3.6*)
1248;4;1.5;1.4;3;0;Changing Directions a lot+Streamjumps+Kicksliders
Which again, no casual player wants to read or understand.
With the current icons - which are known to not reflect difficulty properly - naming difficulties is
not easy impossible and it kind of fucks with all difficulty naming so far.
While I think that fucking with difficulty naming in standard and making it tie to gameplayelement usage is a very good idea this is FAR away from being polished and usable.
If you already do stuff while excluding the public you should try to think stuff to its end instead of making a scheme and then posting it into the forums. I'm very dissatisfied with having such a halfhearted piece of a rulescheme thrown at me.
If you are going to rewrite RC you have to consider every part of it. It doesn't make sense to write one part, toss it to the hard rules and then write the next one without really caring about context.
kudosu pls - oh wait, kudosu are stil useless...